Part 1: economics sucks, and you can't tell crank form non-crank. Part 2: here's a bunch of strong claims based only on indirect evidence.
So, someone did a follow-up attack. This one bothered to look at my site and compile some evidence.https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/633ufb/by_the_ignorant_for_the_ignorant_what_is_a/ …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You've only got a bachelor's? I think more highly of you now.
-
That's the thing about that argument, right? Either it's extra bad or extra good. :p (And yes, in linguistics)
-
Those who care can read my bachelor thesis here (in English): http://lyddansk.dk/?p=226
-
With the additional data point of orthographic reform, you have now tipped over into crank status. =)
-
For reference, here is the spelling reform page on my own website.http://www.benespen.com/journal/2014/11/11/the-long-view-spelling-reform.html …
-
SR is an interesting topic, but unlikely to be carried out bc very strong status quo bias. Also less important with time bc spellcheckers.
-
LOL! That earned me an auto-follow from a spelling reform account.
-
Who me? I'm a bit old fashioned and only follow after checking out an account.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
"Intelligence, a low-impact journal" xDD He is doing what I describe in my blog as 'express rejection of evidence', which can be rational
-
From his point of view(bayesian la) , given what he knows about you.
-
Yes, his 6 classical indicators are very indicative of crackpot, and yet it is not true in this case (I hope). But one cannot know without
-
reading stuff on the topic. One must be a topic expert to be able to make firm judgments. E.g. consider similar case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Lee_Whorf …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
follow up.... on what? i must have missed it
-
There was another one first: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/631haf/on_the_commentariat_here_and_why_i_dont_think_i/ … The second one is much more rigorous. The first one is a RationalWiki drive-by.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
From the comments: "Let's not take epistemic learned helplessness to pathological levels."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I read the post you linked yesterday. OP made dumb argument. What is Scott supposed to do, ban ppl like you or Steve Sailer for innocuous...
-
posts/for things they have written in other places? Should Scott ban all HBDers or HBD discussion? What action does OP want?
-
I don't participate much in SSC discussion, but I recognize that commentariat != Scott, just as comments on CNN != the reporter.
-
I don't say to myself, "Gee, I would send my friend this news article, but there are offensive comments on it." That's how comments often R
-
I understand the whole anti-SJW tone might be off-putting to many libs, and I know some who probably are off-put by that,
-
but that's more a matter of tweaking community standards/encouraging different kinds of discussion, whereas this guy seem more like...
-
"OH NO a non-left wing opinion! I'm not used to that, so let's eliminate them!" rather than engaging. Ehh.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.